“I will make a presentation to the board after I talk to the [Rhode Island] attorney general,” said Klepper on Monday. “I don’t know if we’ll vote again or not. It will be up to the board.”

You would think after 4 to 5 years now of this issue of the BCWA having no clue what the simplest law ever written in the simplest language for the public to understand. The BCWA would have taken advantage of the AG free training on it, instead of always calling the AG after the fact or spending $65,000 dollars to fight the AG over a $1,000 dollar fine.

The history of Macks representation over the last 18 years and the state of the BCWA legal problems with various towns and project she has handle speaks for itself to why her firm should be thrown to the curb in my opinion.

Why only 2 Board members got that at the 20th meeting and were ignored when they brought it up says a lot about the ones that voted for staus quo of 18 years of failure of fiscal responsibility. Also in my opinion. What a typical mess the BCWA is in yet again.

In my experience - if you use the same law firm or accounting firm for over 20 years - it is time to look for new representation. Yes they know your business - but a fresh set of eyes seems warranted.

Forgot the other fact brought up by one of those board members. She cannot practice law in MA, so an associate has to do those cases. Like the one that currently will occur according to the board on the Anawan problem. I realize that yes that may legal to do.

However when those that support her re-appointment state that their reasoning was Mack has the expertise and experience of dealing with these type of cases. Should not the lead attorney be the one going to MA.

I was not aware she could not practice in MA. You would think after all these years knowing that there will always be cases in MA since the BCWA has property there and pipelines, that she would have over 18 years got whatever it takes to practice there.

As usual none of this makes sense other than the continuing saga of good old boys club and cash cow that has been there since the enabling Legislation that formed this BCWA money pit that never stop digging itself deeper and deeper in debt. My opinion is yet again to dissolve it and let the state take it over.

It looks like and act like Central Falls problems when you look at the last 20 years. Why does it take decades for politicians and appointee’s to figure out something is a failure and beyond repair? geesh

In January, 2011, BCWA was sent a letter from the RI Water Resources Board reminding BCWA that the statutorily mandated "Plan" was overdue, by 18 years at that point.

On the same day, BCWA Chairman John Jannitto sent a letter to the Patch reaffirming - "The BCWA board unanimously supports moving forward with the Shad Pipeline Project and the Child Street Water Treatment Plant upgrade."

http://barrington.patch.com/articles/backup-water-supply-critical-to-bristol-county

Now rate payers are being told that the "Shad Pipeline Project and the Child Street Water Treatment Plant upgrade" are not in rate payers best interest, in part because the water quality from the Mass reservoirs is of such poor quality.

I blame BCWA's lack of a statutorily mandated plan for most of BCWA's prior problems and mismanagement. The key phrase is "statutorily mandated".

During this time, BCWA's legal counsel was charging ratepayers $475 per hour for her counsel. BCWA now wants to reward her with a vote of new confidence.

Residents should question the board's judgement, or lack thereof, on this important vote. After all, you've been drinking this heavily processed water for decades, when instead, you might have been drinking 100% Scituate Reservoir water,one of the best supplies in the nation, for less cost per gallon.

Isn't it true that Mack represented both RWU AND the BCWA in the water tower deal that ratepayers are stuck with now?

Remember the forum two years ago when Ms. Mack stood up and stated the she LOVED the taste of the Shad water?

My take on this is that there are several members of the board who are concerned about what a new attorney would uncover in the past records? Where did the 3.2 million come from in 1998? Why has there never been a complete audit of all spending for the Bristol County Water Authority Act? What about land deals? Where did the 5Million for cost overrun go? Until there is a clean slate it will be impossible to really fix anything. Director Jannito stated in a taped interview that they needed Ms. Mack there to "keep them out of hot water". Truer words were never spoken. But shouldn't the attorney be looking out for the ratepayers?

Maybe it is time to look for another way to manage our water instead of just shoving things under the rug and continuing to run a "pretend" treatment plant.

Ratepayers paid for Ferry Rd to be dug up for RWU and are stuck maintaining the RWU water tower at ratepayer expense. Based on what I read about costs at another BCWA dig Ferry Rd and that pipe had to be at least $1 million. The Tower came gratis out of taxpayer pockets from 'stimulus funds'.

Meanwhile Metacom Ave residents are stuck with paying for pumps and tanks out of their own pocket.

What did DeLise tell you Jack that residents there shouldn't have bought homes there where pressure was bad? You think the same thing would apply to building a huge school at the far end of Bristol? Nope.

Hey, remember the "probing letter"?

http://bristol-warren.patch.com/articles/letter-watchdogs-support-bcwa-critics

At tonight's meeting (Jan. 9th), BCWA announced that they would be starting over again in the attorney interviews. Assuming that they can get the other four attorney's to come back, they will re-interview next Wednesday, Jan 16th, and meet at 6:00pm to vote. Attorney General's office told them they were wrong. So, if you do not want to see them spend $375.00 per hour on an attorney, I suggest you speak up now or attend next week's meeting.